Sunday, February 7, 2010

As the Tehran Times announces that Iran is optimistic about the uranium swap deal(to enrich uranium in a foreign country such as Russia and return it to Iran), CNN is reporting that Ahmadinejad is ordering uranium enrichment to begin domestically.

What is one to make of these mixed messages? Well that depends on who you believe. Clearly the corporate/government press of the West has taken a liking to the evil Ahmadinejad story as Fox and The Washington Post also run with 'Ahmadinejad orders higher enrichment of uranium' as headline. Of course the New York Times as well.

"But Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of Iran's Atomic Energy Organization, denied that production would start immediately, saying that the president instructed his organization to start production of 20 percent enriched uranium only if talks on the swap fail..."The Iranian president has underlined that the main focus has been the swap deal," Salehi told state news agency IRNA. "He asked our organization to initiate a plan to enrich uranium 20 percent. As soon as the Iranian president declares that talks on the swap deal are over, and upon direct order from the president, the operation will start at the Natanz site.""

So the enrichment is just a threat if somehow the uranium deal falls through. Ok. But in the the New York Times article all you hear of is that the deal is dead:

“We have to agree, that deal is dead,” said Valerie Lincy, senior associate at the Wisconsin Project on Nuclear Arms Control.

Who is this Valerie Lincy you might ask? Valerie Lincy happens to be Editor and Principal investigator of 'Iran Watch.' She also happens to be one of those who was firmly committed to the dangers of Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction as we can see from this article from 2003. You remember those weapons of mass destruction? Those were the ones nobody could ever find.

"Because of technological limitations, there are serious doubts that Iran could actually reach 20 percent enrichment, and even if it could there would still be significant hurdles to overcome before it could operate the reactor. Ahmadinejad immediately followed his order[for domestic enrichment], broadcast on state television, with a comment that negotiations with the West over the proposed uranium swap are not over."

In an earlier article the New York Times had nonchalantly mentioned the swap deal, albeit without much enthusiasm as 'Iran Avows Willingness to Swap Some Uranium', as if it were an NFL draft deal and not a possible end to a crisis which could trigger World War IV (or III depending on how you count.)

Of course that brings us to what this is all about, World War IV, something that Norman Podhoretz has described as 'The Long Struggle Against Islamofascism.'

To men like Podhoretz who literally lust for war with any of Israel's supposed enemies, any chance of a peace deal must be buried so the war preparations may continue. The editorials of Norman Podhoretz, William Kristol and other hawks like them have often appeared in the New York Times or the Washington Post and I don't find it hard to believe that such an attitude is shared by many in the fairly hawkish corporate media establishment. Certainly anyone who reads the New York Times on a regular basis has been inundated with scare articles about Iran threats.

And all this fear and propaganda may be leading somewhere dangerous. At this very moment the Israeli navy is on its way to the Persian Gulf.

Author's Note: Since the Washington Post is continually editing its articles and taking out the parts which were originally in it, I will include two screen shots of one of the articles mentioned to examine below. It's the article which includes the statements from Mr. Salehi and the writer which downplay the tone of imminent danger in this and other articles.